On EconLog:
The first half of his statement is pretty funny too -- "stimulus has never driven a county into debt crisis," but certainly all the spending beforehand has.
Because he says "stimulus" instead of "government spending" he protects himself against making a ludicrous claim. But he's left with a meaningless statement -- of course "stimulus" that occurs as a suggested cure to a recession doesn't push the country into a debt crisis, it's a drop in the bucket compared to all the spending (which in retrospect seems like too much, because it is based on inaccurate revenue estimates) from before. It's like saying "of course that last laptop I bought didn't push me into bankruptcy, it was only 1000 dollars, and I owe $100k!"
Repeating a common theme in my posting lately, we see more hollow language from a preeminent economist. But I also like it because it speaks to the faulty profit/loss mechanism that goes into most government spending. So on that count as well, the stimulus didn't kill us, but it will probably make things even worse.
